BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.04.2024 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA W.P.(MD) Nos.29153 & 29154 of 2023 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.25195 & 25198 of 2023 Jadeeeda Saleem ... Petitioner in W.P(MD)No.29153/2023 K.Maheswari ... Petitioner in W.P(MD)No.29154/2023 Vs.

1.The Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Madurai Region, Door No.268, Paalam Station Road, Sellur, Madurai – 625 002.

2.The District Collector & Secretary, Muqyyath Sha Sirguro, Wakf Board College, Madurai – 625 020.

3.The Principal, Muqyyath Sha Sirguro, Wakf Board College, Madurai – 625 020. ...Respondents in both W.Ps'

Common Prayer : Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings of the third respondent in reference Memo in Na.Ka.Nos.5331/TS/JS/Recov./MSSWBC/2023 & 5331/TS/ KM/ Recov./MSSWBW/2023, dated 16.08.2023 and consequent impugned proceedings of the second respondent in reference memo in Na.Ka.Nos.5331/TS/JS/Recov./MSSWBC/2023 & 5331/TS/KM/

Recov./MSSWBC/2023, dated 05.10.2023 and quash the same.

(In Both W.Ps')

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Veerapandian for M/s.Vast Law Associates For Respondents : Mr.T.Amjadkhan - for R.1 & R.2 Government Advocate : Mr.S.A.Ajmal Khan - for R.3

COMMON ORDER

Heard Mr.V.Veerapandian learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.T.Amjadkhan, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.S.A.Ajmal Khan, learned counsel appearing for the third respondent.

2. The petitioners have filed these writ petitions for quashing the impugned order of cancelling the incentive increment for obtaining Ph.D. and the consequential recovery order. 3.1. The petitioners were originally joined as Assistant Professors (English) in the MSS Wakf Board College on 02.02.2010 and on completion of probation period, they were confirmed and appointed as Assistant Professors on and from 01.02.2012. Thereafter, in the month of April, 2016, they got their Doctorate in English (P.hd.), and they were given incentive increments as per G.O.(Ms)No.350 Higher Education (H1) Department, dated 09.09.2009. However, during Audit, objections were raised with regard to incentive increment awarded to them by stating that as per G.O.(Ms).No.145 Higher Education Department (H1) dated 06.07.2018, no incentive increment would be granted for those who have obtained P.hd., degree after 01.01.2016. The respondents 2 and 3 have directed the petitioners to remit the increment amount that was given to them till such date. However, it is the case of the petitioners that G.O(Ms)No.145 Higher Education Department dated 06.07.2018 was not related to them. However, the Joint Director of Collegiate Education had conducted the inspection in the year 2020-2021 and recommended for recovery vide reference memo, dated 16.08.2023 through the third respondent. Thereafter, the petitioners sent representations dated 17.08.2023 to the District Collector to drop the audit recommendation and continue to pay the increment without any deductions. In response thereto, the second respondent issued notice dated 05.10.2023 stating that the petitioners were not eligible for increment.

3.2. However, even without issuing any notice and without hearing the petitioner, the third respondent passed the impugned proceedings dated 16.08.2023 and consequential impugned proceedings of the second respondent dated 05.10.2023 cancelling the incentive increment granted to the petitioners and ordered recovery. Challenging the same, the petitioners are before this Court.

4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and others vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) reported in AIR 2015 SC 696 had held that recovery of excess payment wrongly made by the Department to Group-C and Group-D employees is impermissible in law. In similar circumstances, this Court in W.P.No.1122 of 2020 and batch dated 23.11.2023 [M.Santha vs. The Joint Director (Employment)